What Is the Link Between Sex and Power in Sexual Harassment?

Source: Politicians in the smoking room of the House of Commons; From Wellcome Images

Accounts of sexual aggression in the worlds of entertainment and politics are abounding on both sides of the Atlantic. Is sexual harassment in these worlds about power?

The study titled "Sexual Aggression When Power Is New: Effects of Acute High Power on Chronically Low-Power Individuals" was partly inspired by previous research, which has found that among men and women strongly interested in casual sex, more power increases beliefs that subordinates are sexually interested in them. In contrast, more power decreased discernment of a subordinate’s sexual interest among those already less interested in casual sex.

Maybe aggression among the powerful arises from a threatened ego? The anecdotal allegations of sexual aggression that are hitting the headlines don’t make the predators sound commanding, rather their crude fumbling seems psychologically impotent.

But this new study reveals that the corrupting effects of power operate the same for men and women. Newly felt authority increases harassment tendencies among people who had been feeling low in power over a previous extended period, whether male or female.

This latest research finds that while men, in general, were more likely to report harassment proclivities compared to women, both men and women are also influenced by power in the same way.

That is, men who are feeling more powerless over an extended period but then experience new heightened power are the most likely to sexually harass, compared to other men. Likewise, women who are low in feeling influential but then gain new authority are the most likely to sexually harass, compared to other women.

The authors of the current study, Melissa Williams, Deborah Gruenfeld, and Lucia Guillory argue that maybe it’s the psychologically insecure, for whom power is compensating for some inadequacy, who are going to abuse influence for sexual advantage.

The study, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, points out that it’s the parents who feel powerless relative to a demanding child are most likely to end up physically abusing their children.

Maybe it’s those who feel low-power because of personal insecurity, no matter the reality of their actual position in a hierarchy, who experience opportunities to wield real power as long-awaited chances to control others.

Previous research has already found that those in positions of power (vs. non-powerholders) are more likely to view people as objects, rather than as individuals.

This latest study involved a series of experiments including exploring the reactions of heterosexual men to attractive, but unavailable, women.

When men who had suffered longer-term feelings of low power were induced to suddenly feel more powerful, they tended to respond with increased hostile sexism toward a rejecting target woman. Acute increases in a sense of power among men who were already confident about being of genuine high power, in fact, lead to decreased hostile sexism towards women.

A recent study using a male-dominated video game found female players were more likely to be harassed by male players whose recent performance had been weak rather than strong, suggesting insecurity about their status as players underpinned the abuse.

Another study found that men lower in social power were more hostile to immigrant men.

Psychologists argue that a subjective sense of one’s own power may not necessarily correspond to objective reality. Some hold positions of power yet may still be feeling inadequate or insecure, or perhaps the trappings of power did not deliver the real authority they had been hoping for.

The study found that acute increases in power decreased sexually aggressive tendencies among those who had experienced high power for an extended period before.

Why, then, psychologically, do people pursue influence?

Is it an unequivocally attractive prospect for self-promotion? Maybe the more responsible power-seeker sees it as less pleasant and more of a burden, an obligation to consider the effects of one’s behavior on others?

The authors of the study conclude there may be a difference between seeing power as an opportunity to do as one wishes versus a responsibility to look out for others.

Don’t get into the lift with anyone who seems to be especially relishing their recent elevation.

References

Sexual aggression when power is new: Effects of acute high power on chronically low-power individuals.

Society unjustly expects women of color like myself to accede to male domination, while forgoing the enjoyment of free expression of sexuality. This is unfair and forces us into stereotypical behavior. Why can't women enjoy sex without consequences as males always have?

Finally something that flies in the face of the same old rhetoric we hear over and over again. As a woman working in a large Corp. I can attest to the fact that women are catty, competitive and bitchy. For the most part men are easier to work with and answer to. As an aside, I've even noticed that when seeing a female Dr. They are more likely to be dismissive and condescending.

So it must be hard to work with you since you're such a catty, bitchy person. Right? Or are you one of the special exceptions that gets a cookie and a pat on the head every time you suck up to men with your tired, sexist generalizations?

The problem with this study is that it ignores the fact that sexual harassment is committed almost entirely by men against women. It's a highly gendered behavior. Even men who are sexually harassed are most often harassed by other men. Women relatively rarely commit this crime. So it's not just about feeling insecure. It's about men exerting power and control over women to put them back in what they believe is their 'place' and role in society. That is the function of male sexual harassment against women. Lets stop beating around the bush please.

The media isn't really providing a balanced lesson for many men in reporting the continuing cascade of sexual assaults and women's stories. For some impressionable young men with little sexual experience, or single men who aren't in a good intimate sexual relationship with a woman, the current spate of news can leave a distorted impression that women generally don't like sex, and are horrified by watching a man masturbate, are horrified to see his penis, etc. What I'm saying is that without the counterweight of a woman to provide a supportive POSITIVE view of sex and how a woman can accept a man's sexually, what they are now superficially hearing is that a constant parade of even famous men are being apparently 100% rejected by women, and are coming.

Certainly, this will have the positive effect of making some men understand that consent is extremely important. But I also think the constant barrage of this news might make some men think that women are very reluctant to have sex, and so you NEED to be very pushy to have any luck at all.

Because totally absent from this discussion in the media (that I've seen) is any instruction about a positive way to approach women, and the fact that women will respond positively.

It seems too often presumed in the pages of PT here and elsewhere in advice columns on men behaving improperly, whether they're assaulting women sexually, watching too much porn, etc. that all of these men have wives and girlfriends at home who are ready and willing to have sex with them. And that just isn't the case for many men, even married men.

And so I just wonder, when a single young man who's not having much luck with dating, or a married man whose wife is rejecting him in bed -- if these men hear only an endless parade of women essentially describing how horrified they are by men's sexuality, I'm not sure it's leaving them with the right impression. They have no woman in their lives to give them a hug and let them know that their sexual feelings are OK and normal.

And so I do wonder if in some way all this news, without a counterbalancing message of positivity from women, isn't just perpetuating the cycle of resentment towards women for some men who aren't getting a balanced message.

Sure it's not the media's "responsibility" to teach positive sex. But unfortunately, much of America has shortchanged the other avenues for positive messages about sex, beginning in schools which can teach only abstinence, etc.

We can only hope that what you call "negative coverage" will result in a sizable number of males believing that women are reluctant to have sex (with them), and just leave it at that and go away. Hopefully, many men will realize the unpleasant and futile nature of the "keep increasing the pressure until you bed a mate" imperative. It is critical for men to let women live as women want, and for women to let men live as men want. Of course, that can succeed only if the "wants" exclude conjugation with the other gender. Surely men cannot be allowed to live as they want if that includes "needing" women! Peaceful coexistence seems perfectly within our reach if only we reduce our expectation from the other gender to zero.

Men should not need hugs from women to feel their sexuality validated. The vast majority of men are biologically and psychologically "normal", as in, performing within the perimeters of their design points as of a couple million years back. The important thing to realize is that a man's normal sexuality does not need to involve a woman in any way. In the same way that a woman will not normally involve a man in the process of going through her periods.